Cinema Discourse

  • Home
  • About
  • Books
  • Classic Movies
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • Cookie Policy

John Lobell – John David Ebert

Movies as Theoretical Narratives


Cinema discourse looks at current and classic movies from a literary point of view. We also have top movie reviews, current movie reviews, film ratings, movie blogs and movie history.
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

December 18, 2015 By John David Ebert 5 Comments

151019_sw.jpg.CROP.original-original

Star Wars Episode 7: The Force Awakens

Reviewed by John David Ebert

The new Star Wars film, directed by J.J. Abrams, is certainly entertaining and fun to watch. It works especially well as a vehicle for Harrison Ford’s character of Han Solo, who dominates the film with an excellent performance (which makes up for the “watered down” Han Solo of Return of the Jedi). The new characters, Rey and Finn, are also very good, likeable and played well (Daisy Ridley is even better than Natalie Portman).

But as for it being a new Star Wars film: that’s where the fun stops and the doubts start creeping in. One expects, from a Star Wars film, a sense of inventiveness and astonishing imagery (whether the dialogue is any good or not; and of course, the dialogue in Episode 7 is one of its strong points). But this film simply does not convey the sense of wonder and awe of either the original trilogy or even the problematic prequels. Everyone agrees, I think, that the main problem with the prequels concerned its “flat” characters and the stiff, wooden performances of its actors. However, those films–which I’ve watched again and again–were packed with stunning visuals: just think of that army of droids in The Phantom Menace being unloaded onto the grassy field in row after row; or the wonderful General Grievous with his four-armed light sabers in Revenge of the Sith; or the incredible climactic battle in Attack of the Clones with one astonishing machine rolling out to assault the viewer’s imagination after the next.

That sense of visual innovation is, I think, what’s missing from the new Star Wars film, the plot of which concerns a search for Luke Skywalker, who has gone into hiding after attempting to set up a Jedi training academy that failed. That’s a fun idea, until you realize that Mark Hamill isn’t even in the film until the very last scene and is not even given any dialogue.

Rumor has it that Lucas was planning on making Episode 7 himself before the Disney deal came along and I think he should have restrained his greed and gone ahead with the project because his creative genius is palpably absent from the new film’s images, even though it is technically speaking a perfectly fun and watchable movie (it reminds me of Apple after the genius of Steve Jobs left: nothing fresh and no innovation until he was brought back and wowed us all with one amazing gadget after the next). Nothing of Lucas’s original story treatments for Episodes 7, 8 and 9 were retained–those can be found on the Net after a careful search–and that’s too bad because one can already tell from the treatments that Lucas was on to something: black hole generators–in Episode 7 as it stands, we have the disappointing Death Star rehash called “the Starkiller”–and the creation of clones of both Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader; the Cloud City of Bespin recoded as a Jedi training academy that is invaded by an army wearing Darth Vader masks, etc. etc. In other words, one fresh, inventive idea after the next. The viewer of Abrams’ technically “correct” and proficiently told tale will find no such thrills here.

What we have instead is a “safe” Star Wars film, built like all Post-Classic Cinema these days on formulae, cliches and repetition of the past. Indeed, the inventiveness is specifically traded out for the film’s sense of nostalgia: look, there goes the Millenium Falcon, piloted once again by Han Solo and Chewbacca! The Empire has been renamed “the First Order” and the Rebellion has become “the Resistance,” but the suits, costumes, sets and ship designs look exactly the same as those of the first two Star Wars films. Nothing fresh at all. And Kylo Ren, though he is a sympathetic villain, is merely a pale imitation of Darth Vader. (This film’s equivalent of “the Emperor” is even worse: a miserable gigantification of Gollum from Jackson’s Lord of the Rings–completely  uninteresting and a total yawn. Lucas would never have allowed such an unimaginative figure to slip past him).

The entire film, in short, is a pale imitation of a Star Wars movie (just as Abrams’ Super 8 was a feeble attempt to imitate a Spielberg film). It’s fun to watch, but unlike the other six films, I don’t think I’d want to see this one again.

And I’ve never felt that way about a Star Wars film before.

Too bad: Lucas should’ve nixed the Disney deal and gone ahead with his own plans. We would’ve gotten a much better, more visually rich and textured film. Word has it that Lucas is bitter about the Disney deal and didn’t even watch the trailer for Episode 7.

Lesson learned: never sell out.

 

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Comments

  1. Kyle Elsbernd says

    December 20, 2015 at 10:12 pm

    Good review. I was eager to read your thoughts.

    I too thought it was safe. I thought, “Really?” when Abrams even rehashed the death star. I’ve heard this movie described as both a sequel and a remake. The changing of terms like the Empire to the First Order reminds me of a musician taking slight liberties with lyrics and melodies to keep somebody else’s work fresh and relevant.

    Still, I was surprised that the rehashed plot didn’t bother me. I thought the heart of the story was emotional. I didn’t care about the first order or the resistance one whit, but I did care about the heroes escaping from danger and reuniting.

    I actually thought the movie was visually stunning. I was amazed that it “felt” like the original Star Wars, yet it carried the original concept further visually: x-wings skimming the water, tie fighters seen through forest canopies, passing ships shaking cameras, extreme zooms, etc.

    I thought several of the choices were interesting from a narrative and visual standpoint: a stormtrooper with a conscience, a farm girl rappelling in the hulk of a beached star destroyer to scavenge, a mute denouement with a legendary knight in self-exile a la Napoleon at Elba, etc.

    I agree that the emperor was disappointing. For the life of me, though, I don’t know how to do that one effectively. The only thing I can think of is making him like a black hole void sucking in all energy around him, his voice not singular but the composite fear and suffering of all dark voices, like those pictures made up of smaller pictures. That might have been too frightening, though, for the Star Wars aesthetic. Just like Star Trek had to tone down the much darker script City on the Edge of Forever to fit its aesthetic, so too was Abrams confined.

    I think the biggest weakness was the lack of spiritual depth. For example, the scene where the female lead is bolstered by the force and then gets angry with the light sabre — I think that she should have gotten calm, let the force take over, channeled action through letting go, as the buddhists say “wu wei,” action through inaction. That could have been accomplished cinematically through directing and maybe a slight special effect. Instead we got the down-to-earth sagacity of WWII fighter pilots, with Han Solo ironically talking about the Force.

    Minor quibbles. They say a play is like a ship with a sail. Every correct directorial decision drives the ship forward, every mistake is a tear in the sail. This movie sailed for me.

    Thanks for you review — always thought-provoking.

  2. John David Ebert says

    December 22, 2015 at 4:22 pm

    Good points, Kyle, those are hard to argue with and I agree with almost all of them except that I didn’t find it visually stunning at all but rather like pre-packaged styroam: Just pull it out of the box and set it up like a display in a bookstore. That’s how the visuals felt to me.

    But, as you can tell from my review, my feelings about the film are ambivalent. I liked all the new characters, but I was disappointed about leaving Mark Hamill out for the most part. I know he’ll dominate 8, but I’m not even sure I’ll bother watching 8.

    I guess I lean toward disappointment with this one. I wanted more of Lucas’s brilliant gadgets, cool robots and romantic feeling for the future that he had in the prequels, a feeling that very much evoked the 1930s universe of Flash Gordon comics and even Winsor McCay’s wonderful futuristic cities, or the paperback covers of almost any given sci-fi novel of the 1950s. That’s what was missing for me. I could feel the hand of Disney at work playing it safe and it irritated me.

  3. Larry Pearce says

    February 27, 2016 at 8:40 pm

    The scene with Rylo Ken and Han on the bridge and the fight scene between Rey, Finn, and Kylo in the snow are two of the very best scenes of any Star Wars film. I was completely taken by surprise by how much I loved the new characters, how much the film really felt like Star Wars on a basic visual level (largely due to it being made on film, perhaps, not with hi tech digital cameras), and how much tragedy and pathos there was in the story- things that “are Star Wars” for me and which were completely lacking in The Prequels. The young actors, unlike The Prequels, are spirited, alive, and feel genuinely INTO IT in a way that none of the people (are they even people?) are in Episodes I,II, and III as they run around doing the usual, stereotypical Star Wars stuff of sword fighting, climbing around fantastic architecture, flying out of a tunnels at the nick of time, and blowing up secret bases. No one seems like they give a damn in The Prequels! There’s a lot of heart in The Force Awakens.

    I haven’t been a big fan of any of Abrams’ past films (except Cloverfield, which he didn’t direct), but I’m a fan of him now. He moves the camera in a much more exciting way than Lucas ever dared (Lucas, even in the original film, nails the camera to the floor and barely ever moves it around), the editing is much more fluid and less stiff than Lucas’s extremely conservative establishing shot-master shot-half shot-“maybe I’ll give you a closeup if you’re lucky”-back to master shot 1940s/50s style of editing (Abrams also thankfully keeps those cornball scene wipes that Lucas loves so much to a bare minimum if he uses any at all), and the action scenes in this new film, because I love the new characters, are so much more thrilling rather than exhausting and cacophonous as the migraine inducing battles and chases are in The Prequels. Notice how Abrams, like Spielberg or Peter Jackson when he’s on it, builds the action gradually, allowing us to get our bearings visually before hurtling us immediately and without warning into the action as Lucas has the bad habit of doing. I often in The prequels have no idea what’s going on at first in a given chase scene (nor do I care because I’m not invested emotionally in any of the characters), thus my brain gives up trying to keep up with all the cold, over-designed digital projectiles endlessly whizzing, transforming, and exploding in my face like a huge swarm of cocaine addled bees. What am I even supposed to be looking at, George? I didn’t have that problem once in The Force Awakens. Abrams is also surprisingly masterful at composing shots filled with romantic wonder and longing- a skill which I don’t think people are talking about enough or are giving him credit. Despite the new film’s devastating financial success, it’s being underrated and over-looked on just a pure cinema level.

    I had pretty low expectations going in. I was hopeful, but didn’t expect much. My only expectation (which for a Star Wars film is pretty high, I guess, considering how oddly detached and dull The Prequels are) was: I hope I like the characters, and hope I Like them enough to want to see them in other Star Wars films. Well, my expectation was well exceeded. I also appreciated how Abrams and co weren’t afraid to just let go and have fun and be silly in certain parts, even though what makes the film linger for me in the end is the pathos of the bridge scene and the snow confrontation. I loved the goofy assed scene on the space station with the octopus blobs. That was sooo rad! It felt like something more from Indiana Jones movie than Star Wars.

    So thank you, JJ Abrams, for giving me chills and making me give a fuck about Star Wars again. It wasn’t easy… Then again, you did have enough time to dissect what wasn’t working in The Prequels and had the resources of The Manhattan Project at your disposal to make it happen. What’s most shocking is that you actually managed to make this jaded jerk smile and teary-eyed for the first time in ages while sitting in a movie theater. Now that wasn’t easy no matter how unlimited your sources.

    Can’t wait for the next chapter.

    My Star Wars Movie Report Card:

    The Phantom Menace: F
    Attack of the Clones: F-
    Revenge of the Sith: B
    A New Hope: A
    The Empire Strikes Back: A+
    Return of the Jedi: B+
    The Force Awakens: A-

  4. Larry Pearce says

    February 27, 2016 at 9:44 pm

    I wish there was a function on here so that we could edit our comments when we discover we’ve made embarrassing typos 🙁 For what it’s worth, I meant “Rylo” in the first paragraph (not “Kylo”), “before” should be “instead of” in the second paragraph, and I meant “resources” in the last paragraph (not “sources.”)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

 

CLICK-FOR-CULTURAL-DISCOURSE

 

CLICK-FOR-VISIONARY-CREATIVITY

 

Contribute

 

Giant-Humans-Tiny-Worlds book cover

 

Post-Classic-Cinema-book
clickforpromovideo

 

Catastrophe book cover

 

newMedia-book

 

CELEBS-ICONS-book

 

Ebert books

Recent Posts

  • Animated Cinematic Innovation Celebrated in the French Alps ~by Larry Ruppel
  • On Annihilation
  • On Blade Runner: 2049
  • On American Gods
  • On Twin Peaks: The Return

Archives

Site

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Resources

  • Articles
  • Books
  • Classic Movies
  • Contact
  • Cookie Policy
  • Data Access Request
  • Help Support John Ebert
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Being John Malkovich
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Inland Empire
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Lost Highway
  • John Lobell on Myths and Movies
  • Privacy Policy

John David Ebert Videos

click for video

Heidegger's Being and Time

click for video

Jean Gebser's Ever-Present Origin

click for video

Kant's Critique of Pure Reason

click for video

Fichte's Science of Knowledge

click for video

Schelling's First Outline of a System of the Philosophy of Nature

click for video

Karl Jaspers' Origin and Goal of History

click for video

Spengler's Decline of the West

click for video

Walter Benjamin's Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproducibility

click for video

Derrida's Of Grammatology

click for video

Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment

click for video

Deleuze & Guattari's A Thousand Plateaus

click for video

Deleuze's Logic of Sense

click for video

Deleuze's Difference and Repetition

click for video

Vattimo's A Farewell to Truth

click for video

Alain Badiou's Ethics

click for video

The Works of Paul Virilio

click for video

Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres

click for video

John David Ebert on The Age of Catastrophe

click for video

John David Ebert on The New Media Invasion

click for video

John David Ebert on Elvis Presley

click for video

On Carroll Quigley and Historical Cycles

click for video

Heiner Muhlmann's Maximal Stress Cooperation Theory of Culture

click for video

On Borkenau's Cycle of the Dead

click for video

John David Ebert interviewed on Kubrick, Gilgamesh and the Dangers of Technology

click for video

John David Ebert Interviewed by the Artist Jacques de Beaufort

 

Click for John Lobell's Website

© 2014 John Lobell & John David Ebert | Webmaster jbQ Media Web & SEO

Manage Cookie Consent
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}